Wednesday in Florida, Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich proposed a lunar base, to be established by 2020 (the end of his putative second term), using prizes as incentives, that could potentially eventually become a U.S. state when the population reached several thousand. Is it politically, economically, or technically feasible?

The Technology

Let’s start with the easy part. Can it be done at all?

Well, NASA has considered lunar bases for decades, and there are many concepts. No show stoppers have ever been found, though we still don’t really understand how to operate in such a harsh environment, particularly the moon dust, which Apollo astronauts described as a real problem, getting into everything and likely to create maintenance issues in precision machinery, or clog up cooling fans. Methods of dealing with it would have to be developed and tested, or lunar inhabitants will rely on replacement equipment shipped from earth. Three-dimensional printers may help with this, if replacement parts can be fabricated in situ using sintered lunar materials, as some postulate.

Other than replacement parts, what about logistics for life support on an airless, waterless body? Well, it turns out that the moon isn’t as waterless as we used to think. Recent NASA probes have discovered more than a billion gallons of it in the form of ice at the bottom of a single crater alone. With water for drinking and agriculture, astronauts can also used electrolysis to generate oxygen for breathing. The nitrogen constituent of breathing air would still have to come from earth, but it could be mostly recycled. There is also oxygen trapped in the silicates of the lunar rocks, which also provides silicon, aluminum, titanium, and other useful materials, as well as iron that can be gathered up by simply dragging a magnet through the lunar dust.

So if we’re willing to spend the money, it appears that we have now, or are about to have the technology needed to support a lunar base.

The Cost

Constellation, NASA’s previous plan to establish a preliminary lunar base by 2020, was canceled a couple year ago because it was far behind schedule, and projected to cost many tens of billions of dollars. Speaker Gingrich proposes to fund the base by setting aside ten percent of NASA’s budget (which would mean a little less than a couple billion a year), so the total cost he is allowing for it would be a little over ten billion in eight years (about the same amount of time that it took to do Apollo). How could it possibly be done so cheaply?

It is laughable that the U.S. would seek to establish a 51st state on the moon or anywhere else, when it can’t even hold on to the 50 states it has, i.e., witness the de facto surrender of the southwestern United States to Mexico.

I did not see this article as an attack on Newt. It was a clear and concise explanation of of a brilliant idea by Newt: Start with a small sum of federal dollars and leverage the private sector to create a multiplier affect. It’s actually quite brilliant.THIS is the kind of outside-the-box thinking we need. It’s too bad the rest of the room is filed with Monkeys with clubs.

I don’t agree with Delia that this is a hit piece. I think it is a good recap of the issues and a fair assessment of the proposed costs, which are far lower than the critics are screaming.

Personally, I’m slightly on the critics side since I think the optics of the idea are not well suited to this election cycle, but I got this wild hunch that Newt’s political senses are an eentsy tiny better than mine or the screamers who hate him with a blind fury in the Ruling Class. In other words, he is probably correct that the idea is likely to appeal to a lot of people. And unlike the other candidates, he recognizes that winning the general election will require some proposals that aren’t all pulled from deep in the conservative’s normal bag of tricks.

The article also points out that the technology isn’t very far away, certainly closer than the technology was in 1960.

Even so, my preference would be that he talk about the idea as something he would propose in the third year of his first term, and make it provisional on a benchmark improvement in the economy and jobs situation.

What you may not understand is that the author (Rand Simberg) is VERY pro-space, and like many who believe our country’s economic future is in part dependent on developing resources, wherever they can be found, knows that Newt is the real deal in this regard.

Mr. Simberg is incapable of attacking Mr. Gingrich within the parameters of this subject matter.

What happens to this proposed 51′st state if the moon colony fails? Earth-based colonies may be conquered by other countries, but are unlikely to have their population go all the way to zero and the biosphere disappear. You can’t say that about a moon colony.

Fail in what sense, ZZZ?? If they do it right, they will be using the resources of the Moon itself, having sent robotic probes ahead to make sure they can reach from their landing sites what they need when they need it as far as raw materials. They will be bringing with them core equipment from which to start both the permanent habitats for the colony and to build yet more equipment, with designs sent up from Earth. As Rand noted 3-d printing could help a lot in this, even fusing regolith alone, and extending to metals and other materials.

Once you are generating Liquid Oxygen by electrolyzing the oxides in the rocks, you will have raw metals as waste from that, and processes to remove them from the siliceous material still there can be set up quickly. That will leave behind the type of oxides that go into making very high strength glass fibers that can be wound into those permanent habitats for strength. Similar processes can make many other materials from native lunar materials. So, the physical part of the colony could make it.

Bad management could still make such a colony fail, but that is most likely in its first few years, before anything like the population needed for statehood is there. We will know if it lives or dies long before 13,000 people are there.

The same will happen as with other abandoned colonies and exploration missions of the past: it will just disappear into the dust of history.

As to “51st state”, I think Newt meant it not as taking posession of the moon for the US so much as the way it would be administered (as an independent political entity rather than a scientific or military station directly under federal control, or some sort of corporate governance by the establishing companies along the lines of the diamond mining operations deBeers sets up in southern Africa).
This of course implies it would be a rather large operation, large enough to have its own political leadership, law enforcement agencies, etc..

I’m not sure I understand why it depends on Newt getting elected. If someone else gets elected and puts Newt in charge of getting the prize funded and the whole competition set in motion, it would the same result.

Levin and Hannity are both livid about the smear job. Rush isn’t livid but alarmed.

Sarah Palin has written a scathing oped on Facebook.

But the Ruling Class republicans are still solidly behind the smear merchent, including nearly every writer at PJM.

Some have started to delete me when I call them out about it.

I never thought I would say it, but I’m starting to consider not voting if Romney wins this way. The Ruling Class has been right there with the marxists for 40 years, scambling around in the dirt, licking up the crumbs. Romney’s desperation and duplicity is revelealing just how evil they are. If they are willing to to wallow in the sewer like this to secure their place at the left hand of the throne, why should any of us think that they will do anyting but postpone the marxist takeover if we make it possible for them to win.

I’ve got to seriously consider whether my family will be better off recognizing that the marxists have won and building that into our plans, rather than kidding ourselves another tine that the scum bags who call themseleves conservatives are any better.

Hi, I’ve read every single word of every single comment you write and I mostly agree (let’s say 99%).
I also think the situation is alarming and, given that, don’t you think that what we really need is someone like Ron Paul? I’ve been pro Gingrich (before I was for Perry, Palin). Sure, we need changes, well, we need more like a revolution to cripple the Leviathan. I think at this point it should be “judgment starts at home” and this is exactly a RonPauline position.

We are so far from having the fusion technology for aneutronic H3 fusion that it wouldn’t even be a medium term goal. Then again, if/when (there are some questions about even being able to extract energy from such a fusion reactor) having a presence on the moon certainly would help.

What all the ridiculers and detractors maybe don’t see is that this is exactly the same kind of fight against crony capitalism that the anti-SOPA argument was all about. In both cases, there are large well established businesses that have a group of politicians and administrators in their pockets, and they are using fake arguments to try to squelch competition.

We should devolve back to the primitives of the Garden of Eden where we walk around dumbly happy, naked, and devoid of technology and are forbidden to eat exotic fruit or explore anything. -Dreams of Hell in the Guise of the Progressive Heaven.

This. NASA could take the 10% of its budget dedicated to prize money each year and place it with a custodial bank, such as State Street or Bank of New York. Interest would be paid to NASA while the cash was held with the bank, and the bank would either pay out the prize when a review board determined the conditions to be met, or it would return the cash to NASA upon the expiration of X years.

Using this approach NASA could pre-fund dozens of prizes in the $100 – $200 million range every fiscal year, with time limits as long as you like. A future Congress can’t un-spend that money.

Simberg: “When Speaker Gingrich proposes that the settlement eventually become a U.S. state, he is implicitly advocating withdrawal from the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, which explicitly prohibits claims of national sovereignty off planet. ”

Thank you!

Until this article, I was the only person on this entire blog who ever mentioned that was a real issue.

But the Treaty also says two other things:

“The activities of non-governmental entities in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, shall require authorization and *continuing supervision* by the appropriate State Party to the Treaty”

That means that Gingrich’s vision of “private enterprise in space” is a fantasy. Any “private enterprise” would have to be under “continuing supervision” by the U.S. Government, which is a signatory to the Treaty. Hence, it’s going to be just like Solyndra, but on a much vaster scale: Corporatism rather than free enterprise.

Simberg: “It wouldn’t be a U.S. state, but it might be a settlement of Americans, with American values, which is probably what the former speaker’s goal is.”

Which IMO would still violate the Outer Space Treaty.

Another clause of the Treaty states that the Moon is “the common heritage of all mankind”. (That’s why when the Apollo astronauts landed on the Moon, they affixed a plaque which said “We came in peace for ALL MANKIND”.)

An American lunar base might be considered by other nations to violate the Treaty. It would have to be more like the International Space Station: Any humans from Earth can go there.

In short, this is an excellent example of why Gingrich fails to impress: He comes up with visionary but half-baked ideas that would cost many billions of dollars–but which don’t stand up to even simple analysis.

You’re entirely correct in pointing out how wretched the Outer Space Treaty is, especially its chilling effects on private enterprise in space … but doesn’t that suggest a very simple solution? I.e. withdrawing from it?

Unfortunately, the Outer Space Treaty is also the only treaty that bans the testing of nuclear weapons in outer space.

If you want to restart the Cold War, just end this Treaty and watch as China orbits a nuclear warhead platform over our heads.

A nuclear warhead fired at Washington D.C. from low earth orbit would hit Washington in under 2 minutes. That might not even be enough time to warn the President before he (and the entire rest of the government) are incinerated.

Not going to find someone wanting mankind to get into space in a large, permemant way more than me, but the moon colony isnt going to happen. At least not using rockets. It takes to dam long to build them, they’re dangerous as hell and at roughly $10,000 per pound to put something in orbit it’s just to expensive.

If we ever manage to climb out of this economic hole, we should start to build a space elevator. $20 to $30 billion would get the first one built and the price would drop with each one after that. Its projected that you could get the pound to orbit cost down to just $50 or even $10. A $10 per pound cost to put something into orbit just about equals the cost of a first class ticket from LA to Paris.

At that price range private money and indiviuals will pour out into space in an organic way. You wont have a few thousand people living on the moon, you will have tens of thousands. Even more living on large orbital bases and Mars.

The way we get to space now is like having the government build huge off road vehicles capable of crossing the US from one coast to another without using any roads, filling stations or motels. Such things have to carry all of the gas, food and water the trip might need. Instead of building ever bigger off road vehicles maybe we should build a highway system.

Sorry, guilty of not reading that. $1,000 pound to orbit cost is nof course great compared to what humanity has been spending. I couldn’t be happier to see the private sector doing the job NASA can no longer seem to do and for a hell of a lot less.

I still think a $100 or $50 price range is better. Best of all a carbon nano-tube ribbon doesn’t explode every twenty or forty times it’s used.

And a space elevator is as far away as sustained fusion. We just don’t have the materials science. We have a material that might work, but no way to fabricate it in the lengths or quantities required, which is as good as not having it. Not that clearing every single equatorial orbit below geosynch is easy. A space elevator might require clearing ***all*** orbital infrastructure below geosynch since all of it crosses the equator and can hit the space elevator. We’ll see cheap sustainable fusion first.

At the current unadulterated rate of inflation 10k will be the average plumber’s weekly salary by 2024. So a per pound cost of implementation is moot. And besides it isn’t how much it costs it is ROE and profit margin dollars that make the investment a good or bad thing. And if we do and China put a nuke sat in orbit our moonsteaders will return the favor in kind. Just a thought.

The space colony idea is really coming from nowhere, sure there were people who thought about it in the past but nobody was clamoring for this to happen. Newt just tossed some red meat to the Florida Space Coast and people are actually treating it like a serious proposal which it definitely is *not*.

We have enough problems here on earth and we don’t have the kind of money it would take to do this. The government of 2012 is a different animal than that of 1963. They can’t even build a tunnel without it costing 10 times projected cost and taking 3 times as long to do it. If we did Apollo today, we would never get to the moon. Even the Shuttle was a boondoggle really, we lost 2 out of 5 and now we can’t even get to the ISS on our own.

The government needs to prove it can handle the basic functions it was intended to accomplish before we give them massive new programs to manage. That means balanced budgets, streamlined tax code, and reducing regulations to get the economy going again. We need to enforce our borders as well. We have plenty of huge issues to keep us busy, we don’t need to colonize the moon just yet.

Do you mean that if columbus would have stayed home and got the church to stop burning witches and then millions of natives would not have been wiped out by disease in north america it would have been a bad thing?

Killing a group of people to steal their land and homes is hardly a good example for exploration.

Why not just say .. the moon is a 9 billion acre unclaimed asset ready to be put on some companies books.

If Man has a future in deep space,
it sure won’t be found on the Moon.

The Moon is an airless, nearly waterless, chunk of rock.

Once you get to the Moon, there’s nothing you can do there to make it a paying proposition. Give me some examples of how a private company could make money on the Moon.

I wish people would stop trying to draw analogies between the colonists who settled North America and colonizing the Moon.

The colonists who settled North America came here because there were natural resources they could live on and profit from. Starting, of course, with AIR they could breathe.

Colonizing the Moon is even tougher than colonizing Antarctica. And you’ll notice, even in the 21st century with a world population of 7 billion and growing, nobody has colonized Antarctica.

There are fabulous natural resources underneath the South Polar cap. You want to do something that might actually be useful? Build a colony at the South Pole. No launch costs. No space suits. Let’s see if we can do that first.

Antarctica is “protected” by the Antarctic Treaty from becoming anything economically useful, just as the Outer Space Treaty ties all hands when it comes to exploitation of off-planet resources. Having said that, I do agree with the idea that colonization of the last continent is great low-hanging fruit compared to life on an airless rock. There is one exception though: in space you can’t hear an environmentalist screaming. An airless rock would be outside their grasp; can you imagine the fit green groups would throw over mineral extraction in Antarctica? Some microscopic critter that looks almost, but not quite, like some other microscopic critter would be enough to get governments to protect the pristine wilderness from the evils of economic activity.

I’ve thought about this before and I like it. It would be a great proof of concept for colonizing Mars if we could build the domed habitats that Mars colonizers are proposing and make them work in an arctic environment. It would be a good first step, but everyone thinks we can just magically erect a lunar colony and the only thing stopping us is the Federal government. You know, the great explorers did it despite the bureaucracy. When it’s technologically possible, it will get done. Right now, it isn’t.

We don’t need to solve Earth’s probs first. Going to and staying on the moon will put things into perspective for western and perhaps eastern civ. We shouldn’t allow moving political target “priorities” to rob us of human primacy, Yankee neo- or first time actual) colonialism, environmental exploration, and scientific assertion.

The genius of prizes is that if no one succeeds we’re not out any money at all. Unfortunately, that’s also their biggest downfall. It means that a private company must a) raise enough capital to fund the entire effort, and b) risk losing all of it if they do not succeed, or if someone else succeeds first. The only reason investors would take that kind of risk with that much money ($10 billion?) is if they are extremely confident they could capture a lucrative market that would earn them a huge return on their investment, and quickly. That means much more than having a hunch. You need to have a very specific idea of the products, the prices, the costs, the market size, the competition, etc. At this juncture in the development of space, there is no business opportunity on the moon sure enough, or large enough, to build that kind of business case on.

As soon as I say this someone will mention helium 3. But that’s still way too speculative. Where are the reactors that can burn helium 3? What will it cost to extract it? How sure are you it’s even present and recoverable in sufficient quantities? Helium 3 mining is pure speculation right now. Nothing you can build a business plan on.

I’m all for space development and space prizes, but they will never get you to the brass ring (a functioning cislunar economy) in one step. There needs to be a series of project, prizes or whatever that build up the infrastructure for cislunar operations over a period of years.

It means that a private company must a) raise enough capital to fund the entire effort, and b) risk losing all of it if they do not succeed, or if someone else succeeds first.

This overlooks the opportunities inherent in an established industry. The prize is merely an inducement; it will not pay the development costs. There are several ongoing space programs as we speak that are funded by private capital. These are the men who can afford their dreams and are willing to lose it all in their pursuit.

Our children are already burdened with paying for our current expenses; let’s shift some of our priorities on their behalf.

I know, I know…Jim Treacher is a “country club, establishment, RINO, RoveRomney apologist”…but his Daily Caller poll has the above questions (and one other).

And heavens no, NOBODY should ever remark that these are far-fetched, poorly thought out, wild-eyed, pie in the sky, bizzaro world notions. Instead, we should accept these as clear-headed, rational, GENERAL ELECTION VOTER attractions.

Yep, that’s the ticket.

Newtonians have the decoder rings to understand the “deeper” meaning. Too bad the rest of the nation …is trying their damndest not to laugh out loud, lest the sound and the fury be UNLEASHED IN 2012!

By the way…who is currently holding the leash and are the rabies tags up to date?

Wait, I think Bryan Preston, Karl Rove, Belladonna Rogers, Ron Radosh, Charles Krauthammer and Ann Coulter have called a meeting of the “establishment club” with a secret whistle only members can hear. It’s being held in a secret place on K Street, NRO is hosting this week. The secret handshake is three fingers and the thumb. Everyone had to donate a ring finger to Newt since he ran out after his last marriage.

Sex on the moon is much more difficult for most mortals, due to weightlessness. Newt has found a way to overcome that problem, and Krispy Kreme will be the corporate sponsor of the First Annual Frau Mauro Highlands Bacchanalian Orgy Festival.

Inner city kid janitors will be hired as temp workers to clean up after the orgy, although there will be chaperones to avoid them learning any “moon ghetto” terms.

There is some concern about getting the “moon clap”…not sure if this is related to the golf clap or not, there has not been any further definition of the term.

After the Newtonians took up the assault on the free market with glee, it was said that they and their candidate had gone over to the dark side. We can only assume this means the side of the moon where the Chief Moonbeam cannot shoot down his moonbeamery to light up our highways…or give free tanning to Brazilian nude beachgoers. Jerry Brown wants royalties on all proceeds.

But,back to the serious business of seriously running a serious campaign for President of the United States.

Brilliant that a visionary (sometimes a bit wacky, sometimes not, but at least he has “that vision thing” that so few other pols have) who actually accomplished important conservative goals while in Congress be mocked so that what, we can get a weather-vane whose only accomplishment will be to better manage our way to insolvency?

On the possibility of a future congress rescinding the prize. The way around that is to establish a non-profit entity to run the contest to award the prize, with NASA criteria set in advance. Then congress appropriates the money and gives it to this private entity. Once out of the hands of congress, it can no longer be rescinded. Of course with this approach you have to get some very honest entity to administer the prize awarding entity, to avoid another Fannie Mae.

Gingrich, who has been interested in space for decades, announces a policy that focuses on using private enterprise to colonize space, rather than massive new government spending, which we can’t afford. Oh, and by the way, it will create wealth and jobs in the private sector.

Romney, on the other hand, apparently only considers space policy as a means to get cheap laughs from an audience.

— Newt’s Lunar Base: What are the costs, technologies, and politics behind the speaker’s promise of a moon colony as the 51st state?

Newt did not “promise” a moon base. But I like the idea. I was six years old when Kennedy proposed landing a man on the moon before the end of the decade. It blew my mind. And when the challenge was actually met, it was one of the happiest moments of my life. And it was one of the proudest moments in U.S. History. I’m still trying to decide between Newt and Mitt, but this proposal to found a moon colony by no means dissuades me from backing the former. I wonder what Mitt thinks about the future of the U.S. space program. Why can’t these men be allowed to just debate the issues of today and tomorrow?

Newt says in his speech about space that we must be able to dream big dreams. I think that eventually humans will have a presence on the moon. Why should we not dream of the starting now. Newt talks about the amazing creativity, invention and innovation that resulted from JFK’s decision that the United States would go to the moon. This is part of what Newt has in mind.

You really have to see Newt speak in his own voice to understand. The “commenters” (read “unimaginative idiots”) in the MSM and the Republican Establishment try to hold Newt’s ideas up to ridicule. But when Abraham Lincoln campaigned that America should build a trans-continental railroad, Lincoln had never seen a train. He was using his IMAGINATION. At that time, Lincoln had only read about trains.

Newt is a visionary. Newt has tremendous solutions in mind. Watch Newt’s speeches and DECIDE FOR YOURSELF.

I support Newt 100% after watching the speeches. Newt’ plan to win the House and SEnate with conservatives is based completely on the energy and genius of the American people. I want to restore our nation to the Constitution. I want this fighting chance to restore our Republic.

Why build on the moon, when we have the dust bowl called the middle east? Honestly there are no resources on the moon, so the colony would be pointless. I would fully support a mission to Mars. But why in gods name would we want to go to the moon and form a colony. unless Newt was thinking of Hedo 4 on the moon, this would be an utter waste. Little knowledge gained since it would just be a space station. Could not even farm on the moon, its a dead rock.

From what I’ve read, there are a number of good reasons for a moon base. It could be a science station much like Antarctica, only focused on astronomy.

But perhaps the best reasons all have to do with future Mars colonization. The moon would be a place to test the equipment and techniques we’ll need on Mars, and in a far harsher environment. It is also so close to the Earth that rescue of the astronauts is possible if something goes wrong, which will not be the case on Mars.

The moon is a natural stepping stone to the cosmos. Think of it as a kiddie wading pool before we dive into the deep end of the grownups’ pool.

Find as many short-term reasons and mid-term justifications as possible, to sell this as soon as possible (even the ultimate ‘Honeymoon in Space’ works for me-if it sells the point). Because the long-term NECESSITY to establish humanity off the Earth as soon as possible cannot be over-emphacized or under-stated. The long-term survival of our species REQUIRES that we be many places in this solar system to prevent inevitable extinction (from whatever cause). The ralying cry: “Rmember The Dinosaurs!”

The deeper message of Newt’s proposal is that government does not have to do ANY large projects. If you can colonize the Moon using incentives, then you can do almost anything:

Rebuild decaying infrastructure?
Establish a smart electric grid?
Provide quality education to all US citizens?
Create a missile defense system that can protect the US?

Once you realize the implications you can see why this scares the crap out of the political establishment and their crony capitalist clients. If Newt does not get the nod for 2012, then at least ensure he has a leading role in the new Administration

The United States no longer possesses the resolve or audacity to claim the moon for itself. India, China, Russia and Brazil would be the first to cry foul. Such an act by America would start a moon race with unforseen consequences.

However one of those consequences would be to bankrupt every country that joined the race since their economic productivity is done with smoke and mirrors and lacks the innovation America has.

Politically, there would immediately be affirmative action squabbling about having the make up of any base look like “Glee” or “Rent.” Screw that. I say let a private company do this and let the rewards go to those that deserve it rather than those who use federal and state bureaucracies to puff themselves up and into places they don’t merit.

Believe me an illegal alien will find a way to the moon if the U.S. does this and will be protected by what now passes for “law” in America. If they can get in the army they can get to the moon. If they wait for the innate genius of Latin America to do it unilaterally they’ll get there sometime around the time the moon collides with Earth in the year 1 billion.

let’s see, right now n.a.s.a.’s mission is to brag about arab scientific achievements, or some sort of rubbish that comes from infinite stupidity. at least newt is proposing something to move us in a vertical direction somewhere.

i recently watched an educational program about children in china, and how they are being taught. every bit of their ability to move up in their society depends on their ability to compete in their studies, as well as in all other areas. these kids stayed up late studying. small children working out calculus, physics, chemistry problems; and, they cried when they came in second in these very regular competitions. i saw a hunger in their eyes. a hunger to learn, to be the very best. it was a hunger we once had in our society, but no more.

compare that to our dumbed down, washed up, lowest common denominator approach to learning these days. we have had for decades now people receiving diplomas for showing up. free college for having babies w/o fathers. free college for being from a certain race/gender/whatever? yeah, that’s where our next great scientists and engineers are going to be produced, NOT.

we owe the rest of the world so much money it is ridiculous. let’s face it. unless serious changes take place in the most basic ways we do things, reaching out and up to compete with these up and coming billions of totally industrious, talented and very smart people is going to be like the tale of the tortoise and the rabbit, except in this case the rabbit ain’t looking back.

The Chinese system isn’t perfect. It can encourage too much rote learning and not enough thinking outside the box; too much regurgitating what the superiors say and not enough thinking for yourself. I don’t mean this to contradict what you have said. The Chinese do work hard and we don’t work hard enough. But their society also has its problems and we should try to evaluate educational systems with our eyes open. Chinese history and culture are very different from our own. What works there and what works here will be very different.

agreed vb. don’t mean to come across as a commie. and rote learning is maybe as bad as no learning. however, what i wanted to emphasize is that they are working feverishly to accomplish something constructive. in doing so, eventually they will succeed. in contract, we are working to demoralize those who strive to succeed, and deconstruct the most powerful machine for wealth building the world has ever known. just about every culture we have touched (japanese, german, you name it) and has emulated our capitalism has bloomed in financial terms. however, like us, when you get wealth, over time the vultures, scavengers, thieves and freeloaders move in wanting something for nothing. wanting their fair share. sound familiar?

Agreed. You could almost say the Chinese are finding pride in their global achievements, while some in America want to punish us for ours. Ultimately, the self esteem curriculum won’t serve our children well. OWS won’t even get us out of debt, much less to a lunar colony.

One factor to keep in mind is that English is the language of science, so Chinese have learned English, especially if they are in STEM fields. This allows them to communicate all over the world, so improving fluency could be a factor in the attractiveness of studying in the US. The reverse is not true. Learning Mandarin doesn’t really help Americans who don’t anticipate dealing directly with China.

I am not saying this is the only reason for the discrepancy, but it is probably one factor.

Problems for Mitt:
(1) How will Mitt fire Paul Allen, the 57th richest man in the world, Microsoft co-founder, sole investor in Burt Rutan’s Spaceship One which made the first private space flight?
(2) How will Mitt fire Sir Richard Branson, the 254th richest person in the world, founder of all Virgin Enterprises, one of which is Virgin Galactic which is turning the Burt Rutan Spaceship One into a paying passenger spaceship line.

Mitt lost the “moon colony” argument due to not being current with either technology (e.g. Spaceship One) or the history of settlement (e.g. “Northwest Ordinance of 1787″) or incentives (e.g. X-Prize).

Those exclaiming about the “1967 Outer Space Treaty” fail to understand that:
(a) a treaty can be withdrawn from (e.g. USA unilaterally withdrawing from “Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty” with USSR)
(b) Article XVI of the “1967 Outer Space Treaty” allows withdrawal from the treaty

Private individuals will settle space as they settled the North American continent. Not a dime of gov’t money need be spent; however, a legal framework, where property rights (Mitt might want to more aggressively defend such) can be established. Cause if Paul Allen or others want to spend their own money settling the moon, might they want some legal recognition of their property rights (e.g. possession is nine-tenths of the law)?

Long term a lunar colony will strengthen our technology on earth (and of course the moon) immensely. The kind of people who think its an absurd idea now , in a hundred years time, will be unable to imagine present day skeptics.

That said , it would be just so inexpressibly galling to have to see statues of that self centered troll all over the moon. This is a catastrophe in the making. Quick someone please take the credit for this initiative before its too late.

People who worked with Gingrich years ago when he was Speaker, know him all too well. That’s why a lot of them are coming out of the woodworks now to shed some light on his true colors, before it’s too late. Case in point, the honorable Bob Dole, who loaned Gingrich $300,000 in 1997 to pay Gingrich’s ethics violation penalty. He was broke then, but, interestingly, 15 years later, Gingrich is a Tiffany-shopping millionaire who became wealthy from giving history lessons (yeah, right!) to influential people and special interest groups in Washington. This quintessential Washington insider, Gingrich, has one significant thing in common with community organizer, Obama — both have never created thousands of jobs in the private sector — unlike Mitt Romney.

Now that moon colonies have been thoroughly debated can we get our eyes back on the ball, namely defeating BHO? The public is worried about the economy, jobs, and the debt burden that has been foisted onto the shoulders of their children and grandchildren. Colonizing the moon isn’t even on the back burner, its not even in the kitchen or the frig or the pantry or the %&*^ing house. When nearly 50 cents on the dollar of every buck the DC whores spend is borrowed from China or magically created by Bernanke we have immediate, systemic problems that make anyone pining for moon colonies look like an out of touch airhead. We don’t need a Captain Kirk, we need someone to defeat BHO

Romney is a progressive, scumbag, smear merchant (channeling O) who has no defendable record of achievement (once again channeling O). Do not support a Massachusetts independent mascarading as a conservative channeling O in so many ways. Romney = Obama.

Going to the moon to visit, we have done that. Going to stay makes the Space Station budget chicken feed. We do need national goals,a promote science, get inventing going better. The first step is to have Teachers beholden to knowledge not the NEA.

Lets work on some nearer goals, like fusion, better Atomic Power, deep space (bottom of the ocean) and the space elevator. I like the contest idea but it probably works for investments in the $20M or less, not $20B.

“And even if a President Gingrich could get the support of Congress to establish such a prize, there would be no guarantee that a future Congress wouldn’t rescind it”

You have touched upon the most serious problem facing businesses in this country today. If I’m building a factory or developing a new technology the return on investment may take 20 years. Even if we had a favorably-inclined administration and Congress today that could all change in two years. Large investments are too risky.

or at least getting started in that direction and benefiting, probably in ways that are unseen, from the process itself

we dont have to be talking about having a colony like “total recall” in the immediate future but just initiating the baby baby steps toawrds the goal of space colonization– is this not better from using the resources for islamic touchy-feelies aka outreach?

I believe in the colonization of space, and if it begins on the moon, so much the better. 2020 is an unrealistic time line in my view, but who knows what advances technology will bring in the next eight years? The real obstacles are money, politics, cultural inertia, and sheer human nature.

When colonization begins in earnest, the human race will see prosperity and advancement never imagined even in our own time. I don’t think that’s a Pollyannish view, I think it’s just where we were meant to go.

Before I read the comments, planetary colonization is something I’ve thought of for half my life. We are not in a technological position at the moment to make a lunar colony happen, and definitely not by 2020. I’m fully in favor of continuing to develop space, but NOW is not the time. There are, as I’m sure other will point out, so many issues still unresolved. The biggest in my mind are, how do you transport all the material to the moon when the tiny Lunar Lander is the extent of our deployment thus far? There is no water, and humans need water first and foremost. That means you can’t even grow a hydroponic garden. We’d have to be sending water via rocket on a regular basis, and that’s just a huge waste of money.

When we can establish a proper space station, then the moon might be the next step, but Mars is still a more likely destination, if we can cut the travel time down to less than six months.

When mankind has finally prohibited the use of force and a man’s action can be completely directed by his reason rather than government dictate, anything is possible including the commercial exploitation of space. But as long as governments are allowed to use force against the innocent to confiscate their earned wealth or regulate productive activities, the possibility of a new Dark Age is much more likely. Proposing the use of government confiscated wealth–even to raise money for a “prize”–for any goal, no matter how worthy it might seem, shows that this principle has not been embraced.

Newt wants to use some level of government force to acheive space goals and Mitt still wants to use government force to acheive health care & other collectivist goals. Newt’s & Mitt’s effectiveness in blocking further statism is inversely proportional to the degree they wish to use statism to achieve any of their “conservative” or “national” goals.

I don’t think these guys get it anymore than 95% of the population. Kinda wears you out.

I like Newt and most of the attacks against him in the Democratic Party’s propaganda wing (otherwise sarcastically known as the “mainstream” media) as well as from Mitt Romney are a grossly unfair double standard.

However, his idea that the moon should be the 51st state is based on, well, lunacy. Aside from the treaty problems, there is also a minimum population requirement for a U.S. territory in order to become a state. I’m not going to bother looking up what it is, but it is safe to say that there aren’t going to be that many people living on the moon anytime soon. Right now the population of the moon is 0. Certainly it won’t happen in the next 50 years, probably not in the next 100.

As Rick Santorum said Newt is an idea a minute, but not all of them are very practical.

DC spends tens of thousands per second, 40+% of it borrowed money, and we are engaged in a discussion about moon colonies?!?! Moon colonies or Mars colonies are all well and good; but until we deal with 16 trillion in debt and 50+ trillion in unfunded liabilities, not to mention trillions in state and municipal debt and liabilities, you are truly fiddling while the barbarians break down the gates. Get a grip people! We’re looking at a deep contraction, perhaps a depression of historical proportions, and people are arguing over moon colonies! WTF?

You’re 100% correct on every point regarding our financial situation, but I’d argue that that’s no reason to pull our heads into our shells like turtles. A robust and booming space industry will create wealth and jobs. And it’s a private sector space industry we need, not a government space program.

The young field of aviation did very well during the depression of the 1930s. There was considerable technological advance, and commercial airlines began sprouting up. There were even long-distance passenger flights over the ocean via the Pan Am Clippers. A depression does not preclude the development of space colonies.

Besides, wouldn’t it be nice to have someplace to flee if things really go sour? (For our descendants, at least. I’m probably too old myself.)

The phrase: “the common heritage of all mankind” is proof that their is no intelligent life on earth (implication: we are alone.)

Simple truth is, it’s unclaimed property. Make all the treaties ya like, the first people to land, inhabit and defend their land become the owners. Always has been, always will be.

We live in an environment where governments are magnitudes more powerful than individuals. This has warped our understanding of certain realities. Space changes that a bit. It’s too big for any combination of governments to control once ISRU becomes a fact. We have a new dynamic where the old will pass away.

i worked in the space program in the 90′s at ksc and cc. it quickly became apparent that government control really puts blinders on direction. imho, private industry needs to lead in most all things new and better in our society. government leading gives us green failed/failing companies. the u.s.s.r. was a clasroom example of why socialism doesn’t work. we got to see the whole bloody disaster first hand. people shot/machine gunned trying to escape over and under that wall. terror on one side, a modern rich world on the other. have we forgotten so soon?

btw, don’t believe for a minute we can’t build a wall to control access. its already been done, except before it was put there to keep people from fleeing communism/socialism. how ironic our beloved kenyan has people believing government control is the best thing ever. go figure.